Nomic: Wiki Edition --- Finished (More or Less)

[Jake The Wolfie]

/in as This could be you!

[Jake The Wolfie]

/out as This could be you!

/in

[Jake The Wolfie]

Sorry, username can't have any excitement :(

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 301: Currency refers to any resource which may be freely traded between players without any cost. Should a law instate a new currency, it must have a name, and one initial way to earn it. If it is not stated, assume that all players start with 0 of the Currency.

VOTE: Yea 301

If that passes, I'll let someone else make a currency


EDIT: changed "reffers" to "refers"

[Jake The Wolfie]

Hmm, what about a colloary, where proposing a failed proposal loses 1 point?

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 303: The Monarch is defined to be exactly one player at a time, who has special abilities that may later be defined. In addition, The Monarch may choose to abdicate their power to a player of their choice. If more than 3/4ths of all active non-Monarch players vote to overthrow the Monarch, then a new Monarch shall be picked with the old Monarch being ineligible for being picked. If a Monarch becomes inactive, a new Monarch shall be picked.
If no player is currently the Monarch, whoever has the most points above 10 and is eligible shall become the Monarch. All inactive players are considered ineligible for becoming the Monarch. If no player currently meets this threshold, the first player to meet this criteria will become the Monarch.

VOTE: Yea 303

I have some plans with this, mainly instituting the first currency, Royalty Coins.

By default The Monarch would be able to spend as many Royalty Coins as the treasury has (Say, 1,000 to start) and would be able to give and take away Royalty coins from players.
If a Monarch had a previous balance of Royalty Coins and they abdicate, then they get to keep twice as many Royalty Coins as they started out with, assuming that the treasury has that many coins. If a Monarch was overthrown, then they lose all of their Royalty Coins.

Edit: Added "If no player currently meets this threshold, the first player to meet this criteria will become the Monarch."

[Jake The Wolfie]

I will also promise to abdicate immediately should I get to be the Monarch, probably to StrangerCoug if I can wrap him into this.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I have edited Proposal 303 to include the following:

If no player currently meets this threshold, the first player to meet this criteria will become the Monarch.

---

The Pagetop Times

Current Immutable Rules:

Spoiler:

101: Players must follow all currently active rules.
102: A rule is active (except as excluded in 103) if it passes and has not
been repealed or amended by another rule.
103: A rule is no longer active if it is completely overridden by another
rule or repealed.
104: No rule shall be made to stop further amendments, additions, or deletions
of the rules.
105: Five active players are required to make, vote upon, or pass proposals.
106: Inactive players automatically abstain on all proposals.
107: Voting threshold changes due to additional players or inactive players
are considered instantly.
108: Immutable rules automatically override mutable rules unless an
immutable rule specifies otherwise.
109: Whenever a mutable law conflicts with a mutable law, or an immutable
law conflicts with an immutable law, the lowest ordinal shall take precedence
unless otherwise dictated by the laws. If both defer to each other, then
the number rule applies again.
110: All players are eligible to vote.
111: All immutable rules may be transmuted to mutable rules by unanimous
consent.
112: Mutable rules may be transmuted to immutable rules by unanimous consent.
113: To calculate the total number of active votes, tally up the number
of votes possessed by active players minus the votes of abstaining players.
114: All new rules are mutable.
115: In the initial ruleset, rules 101-118 are immutable, and rules
201-214 are mutable.
116: It takes unanimous consent from all other players to override the
moderator on the formatting of the game's associated wiki pages.
117: Players must follow the formatting and updating guidelines specified in
the rules and by the moderator.
118: Players must help update the game status by adding their name when they
vote for or against a proposal and by marking when a proposal has been
accepted or rejected. (Note that these refer to updating the wiki pages.)

Current Mutable Rules:

Spoiler:

201: All players are given one vote to vote Yea or Nea to proposals.
202: An inactive player is any player who has not posted for a total of
72 hours.
203: Unless otherwise specified, immutable rules must be transmuted before
they are amended or repealed.
204: Unless otherwise specified, all mutable rules require an absolute
majority of active votes to amend or repeal.
205: New proposals begin at 301 and ascend in number. They are numbered
in accordance to the time they are proposed regardless of whether they pass
or fail.
206: New rules require an absolute majority of active votes to pass.
207: The game begins when there are at least five active players,
including the moderator.
208: There may be no more than five pending proposals at any given time.
A pending proposal is a proposal that has not yet been marked as having
passed or failed.
209: Votes for proposals should be done using the vote tags and include
"Yea" or "Nay" (and variants and any other options that are allowed in
future rules) and include the proposal number.
210: It is the player's responsibility to number proposals correctly.
Proposals with missing or incorrect numbers are automatically failed and
are not added to the proposal history.
211: Players may VOTE: ABSTAIN # to abstain on a proposal. (Please use
vote tags or bold.)
212: To join, simply post /in.
213: All players start with 0 points.
214: The first player to reach 100 points wins the game.

301: Currency refers to any resource which may be freely traded between players without any cost. Should a law instate a new currency, it must have a name, and one initial way to earn it. If it is not stated, assume that all players start with 0 of the Currency.
302: The player who proposes a proposal that passes gains 1 point. This rule is retroactive at the time of enactment.

Current Proposals:

Proposal 303 (Post 19) by Jake The Wolfie: The Monarch is defined to be exactly one player at a time, who has special abilities that may later be defined. In addition, The Monarch may choose to abdicate their power to a player of their choice. If more than 3/4ths of all active non-Monarch players vote to overthrow the Monarch, then a new Monarch shall be picked with the old Monarch being ineligible for being picked. If a Monarch becomes inactive, a new Monarch shall be picked.
If no player is currently the Monarch, whoever has the most points above 10 and is eligible shall become the Monarch. All inactive players are considered ineligible for becoming the Monarch.
Yea - Jake The Wolfie (19)
Nay - lendunistus (21)
Not Voting - Ircher, tris, Charles510

Current Standings:

1. Ircher - 1 point
   
2. Jake The Wolfie - 1 point
   
3. tris - 0 points
   
4. lendunistus - 0 points
   
5. Charles510 - 0 points

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: Yea 304
VOTE: Yea 305

[Jake The Wolfie]

72 Concecutive Hours

!!!

Coug!!!

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 311: Shiny Rocks are a type of Currency. Each player gains 10 Shiny Rocks for each point that they gain, including retroactively.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Instead of naming it something modern like "Coins" or some crap, we are all but crows collecting shiny rocks.

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: Nay 311, at least until the points thing is sorted out.

Points are how one wins the game. It is baked into the initial ruleset. I'm setting somw groundwork for a new currency, so that we might get some exchange going on.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Shiny rocks themselves aren't worth much. They're meant to be a small token for gaining some points, and aren't meant to be spent in large quantities, certainly not meant to be used to gain more points.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Isn't a majority 4, not 3?

[Jake The Wolfie]

StrangerCoug abstaining also means that it doesn't fail, as you need 4 votes to fail it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: Nay 313

I didn't

[Jake The Wolfie]

It is pointless. There isn't really a reason for it. If you had reservations about a proposal, you would say so.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I would be like ordering a cheese burger with a meat patty and cheese. It's unnecessary to say "Oh btw I have reservations about this prop"

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 315: Amend Rule 208 to say the following:
There may be no more than X pending proposals at any given time, where X is the largest of either 5, or 5 + 1/2 * (# of active players - 5), rounded down if necessecary. The only exception is when an active player becoming inactive would cause X to be less than the current number of proposals.
A pending proposal is a proposal that has not yet been marked as having passed or failed.

[Jake The Wolfie]

This allows the game to kinda scale should we suddenly get a rush of players.

At any rate, we'd get a new pending proposal slot immediately.

[Jake The Wolfie]

But that doesn't scale well, does it? If we got over 10 players here, then most players won't

have

points/currency to spend, or we'll have a flood of proposals.

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: Nay 316

This seems very easy to accrue thousands of N$ for later use to essentially buy out whatever the hell you want

[Jake The Wolfie]

If someone who has a lot of N$ exists, then everything that is actually good will cost way too much, because otherwise they could buy in bulk and sweep the game.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Ircher, the Nomical Bank is perhaps thee most boring thing I have read, and I have read the literal dictionary, and The DnD player's handbook.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Will these positions be recallable at any time? Can they be replaced immediately if they wreak havoc on the players? How long will their terms be? Is the Nomic bank really necessary?

[Jake The Wolfie]

The Central Bank of Coug sounds amazing

[Jake The Wolfie]

Glad you'll be on board for not instituting el bank o cougar

[Jake The Wolfie]

I don't particularly like 320.

[Jake The Wolfie]

That sounds spicy.

Throw in the motion that I shall be called Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle for 1 week.

[Jake The Wolfie]

And for every infraction, I get 25N$, and they lose either 1 point, or 50$N, if they don't have any points.

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: YEA M001

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 322: A Conditional Vote is defined to be the following: If a player inserts the keywords "Conditional" before the Yea or Nay, and includes the condition within the line that contains the vote in bold, then the vote will a Conditional Vote. A Conditional Vote will only count when the bolded condition becomes true. If the bolded condition is impossible, the vote will be voided. While the bolded condition is possible but has not occurred yet, the player will not vote.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 323: If a player breaks any rule, they cannot earn points for the next 24 hours. If the same player breaks any rule within this timeframe, add 24 more hours to the timeframe. In addition, that player loses 1 point. For each additional rule break by the same player within this timeframe, they lose X points, where X equals how many rules that player has broken. In addition, 24 hours will be added to their timeframe.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Here's a bastard idea:

Each of us, going in some order, gets to create a new Temporary Rule (Starting at T000). These rules go into effect immediately, but there are a few restrictions that they have, mainly no instant wins (such as Player X gains 100 points) and no changing the structure of this process (such as Player Y is considered to be inactive while this rule exists)
On your turn, you may choose to either create a Temporary Rule, or retract a Temporary Rule.

Of course, we could also do this in a miniature game of nomic within our game of nomic, which might be fun.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Interesting idea:

A miniature board game (similar to Betrayal at the Haunted House on the Hill), where certain rules only apply in certain rooms. Any time a player investigates a room, they may either create the first rule in that room, or decide what the room looks like (with everyone else voting on the other property of the room)

[Jake The Wolfie]

I'm tempted to propose the following:

"Apple. This requires Unanimous consent + consent from at least one Mish Mash Moderator to pass."

[Jake The Wolfie]

I don't think that a Motion should be able to bypass a Mutable rule.

[Jake The Wolfie]

VOTE: Conditional Yea 321

If both M001 passes, and if Ircher grants me both N$850 and a 1-time coupon to secure their vote on either a proposal or motion.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 324: If an item is denoted as being Permanent, then it will stay inside of the Nomic Shop indefinitely unless some other effect removes it from the Nomic Shop. Furthermore, items what are meant to outlast their Motion but are not meant to stay forever can be added either as a Limited Supply, which would require how many of that item is stocked within the shop, or as Limited Time, which would require how much time that item is inside of the shop. Each time an item in Limited Supply is bought, the number representing how many of that item exist goes down by 1. If this would cause this number to go to 0, then the item shall be removed. If this would cause the number to go below 0, the transaction will not go through. After the amount of time a Limited Time item is allotted to stay inside of the shop, that item shall be removed.

This should make adding items to the nomic shop a bit easier.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Accept N$850 from Ircher

[Jake The Wolfie]

Before 321 is accepted, I must also receive that coupon from Ircher, as per the condition.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Both 323 and 324 pass.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M002: (This motion lasts 1 second)The Nomic Shop receives the following Permanent Item: Vote Coupon ([PLAYERNAME]), N$100 - This item can be traded with other players and can be used. When bought, replace [PLAYERNAME] with the player's name who bought it. If it is used, the user must choose one proposal or motion that they are currently voting for. Assuming this is the case, the vote coupon is destroyed, and [PLAYERNAME]'s vote automatically changes to align with the user on the chosen proposal or motion. In addition, [PLAYERNAME] may not change their own vote on chosen proposal or motion via any method, however other players may change [PLAYERNAME]'s vote.

I will grant Ircher the necessary funds to purchace this item should the motion go through.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 325: Items can be bought from The Item Shop by posting in bold the following format, replacing [Amount] with the number of it item they want, and [ItemName] with the item to be purchased: Buy [Amount] [ItemName]

Might as well also provide a way to buy the damn things.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Edited M002 to include the following:

In addition, [PLAYERNAME] may not change their own vote on chosen proposal or motion via any method, however other players may change [PLAYERNAME]'s vote.

[Jake The Wolfie]

325 passes

M002 currently has 2 votes for it and 1 vote against it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Wiki has been updated.

[Jake The Wolfie]

3 votes of the required 4

[Jake The Wolfie]

I counted, and I think Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle only has 4 points for 301, 322, 323, and 324. This is at least what I have with regards to the archive. (Motions don't count as they are "proposed motions" and not proposals.) Can someone else double-check this?

With regards to 326, that sounds like a good idea. I added a subsection for the shop under player statuses, but we could certainly move it to a new page.
VOTE: Yea 326

Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle has 5 points, as 325 is mine

[Jake The Wolfie]

What if we had Mana?

[Jake The Wolfie]

Hmm, what if we could gain mana like in Magic, where you could gain land (such as from purchasing it from el shoppe) and every 24 hours all tapped land regenerates, or gets untappedn

[Jake The Wolfie]

Give Ircher N$100

There you go.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Concept: Vote Tokens. Each vote token is worth 1/X votes, where X is the number of vote tokens that exist. Upon using 1 vote token, it is destroyed.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I think because Charles left, and because tris is inactive, majority is now 3

[Jake The Wolfie]

Water & Water & Water Water

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 328: Mana exists in the 5 +1 colors from

Magic: the Gathering

. Each color is denoted as follows: White - W, Black - B, Blue - U, Green - G, Red - R, Colorless - C.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M003: (This motion lasts 1 second.) The Nomic Shop receives 5 +1 permanent Items. The first 5 are Basic Colored Lands, one for each type of colored Mana, which all follow the standard

Magic: the Gathering

naming convention. They cost N$250 each. The +1 is the Basic Colorless Land, named Wastes, which costs N$125. Each item should be listed as follows, where [LAND NAME] and [MANA SYMBOL] are replaced with their respective Basic land/Mana Symbol pair (such as Swamp and B): [LAND NAME] (Land) - Tap this land to gain 1 [MANA SYMBOL]. You may only buy 1 Land Item per day.

[Jake The Wolfie]

The main reason why Wastes would be cheaper is that most spells would require colored Mana, while Wastes can only produce colorless Mana.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I wouldn't be that uncreative.

At the very least, I would allow for other people to win too.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 329: When any Non-player who has not previously joined the game joins the game, they may grant 5 points to any active player. Doing so will grant them 1 point and N$250. This one-time grant shall be in the following format, where [Player] is replaced with the target player's name, and must be bolded: Recruitment Bonus: [Player]. If a new player does not use this ability within 24 hours, they may not ever use it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Buy 5 Vote Coupons

Holding an unofficial auction. Starting bid is N$100. Whoever bids the largest amount gets 3 of my vote coupons. This auction expires in (expired on 2021-11-04 22:09:43)

[Jake The Wolfie]

Buy 1 Wastes

[Jake The Wolfie]

Current Highest big for My 3 vote Coupons is N$300

[Jake The Wolfie]

Wiki updated

[Jake The Wolfie]

Bet N$300.01.

I, as the host of this auction, am striking this bid down. Please round your bid to the nearest N$5

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M004: For the next 168 hours, if a player has broken, the rules or has in any way cheated the game, if they are not caught withing 36 hours then they shall not be punished. This will apply retroactively as well. In addition, the first player whom catches another player cheating will be given 2 points and N$200.

I believe that if you can get away with cheating for a day and a half, then you should be able to just get away with it, not just because cheating is fun, but because catching people cheating is even more fun.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Why shouldn't motions award points, Ircher? What should award points, because right now the only way to earn points is by getting proposals passed. You sound like you want this game to drag on forever.

[Jake The Wolfie]

After we get the central bank passed the next order of business imo is gamification of the currencies, figuring out good objectives to award points for

Do you want capitalism? Because that's how you get capitalism.

[Jake The Wolfie]

If:
Currency is gamified and required to win
And:
There is a small number of individuals who are all able to control the currency

Then:
You get fucking capitalism

[Jake The Wolfie]

Why is representative democracy good in your opinion?

[Jake The Wolfie]

If:
Currency is gamified and required to win
And:
There is a small number of individuals who are all able to control the currency

Then:
You get fucking capitalism

Yo I didn't know that capitalists are democratically elected I should try running for Minister of Being Rich irl.

Naw but the BoD pretty much only controls exchange rates and if you think they're doin' a rubbish job you can say so and/or try to vote them out at the next election and/or try to get the head director dismissed and/or executive review their decisions.

By the way, only the head director can call for an executive review of their actions.

[Jake The Wolfie]

The thing here tho is that if a board member doesn't care (is a Bored Member), then they can "sell" their position to whoever and suddenly we have an unofficial but still active board member who we have no guarantee will be a good fit for the job.

[Jake The Wolfie]

We should agree not to re-elect corrupt board members.

Yeah, but that is a little counter to what would be good for you, would it not be?

If you have power, sure you could use it strictly to your advantage, or you could sell it to others for profit if you aren't entirely sure (or don't particularly care) how your power is used.

Also, how do you know who is acting corruptly and who isn't? I'm assuming that private communication about the game is allowed between players, because that could end poorly if it isn't.

[Jake The Wolfie]

The thing is that corruption is neither obvious nor explicit. Corruption could mean as little as "Don't apply sanctions to me" or as big as "uncirculate all currency except for mine"

[Jake The Wolfie]

I for one do not intend to communicate in DMs except to make my vote, and I am not opposed to explicitly banning it in the rules

This seems like a very bad idea, mainly because this would make selfishness much higher (as it would be easiest to cooperate with yourself alone instead of with others, but only through public means), and it would make the game much more bland and uneventful (you're basically forced to play the game in one certain way, by tailoring everything to appeal to everyone else) until the very end (where a breaking strategy is discovered and a player basically wins out of nowhere)

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 337: ªpple

[Jake The Wolfie]

It'll be fine, Ircher.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M005: Should proposal 337 pass, Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle will not gain 1 point for it. This motion lasts for either 168 hours or until 337 passes, whichever is shorter. This will fail if proposal 337 fails.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I do wish we had just two more players or so. How about a recruitment incentive in Nomic dollars

Too fucking bad. The last time something like that was suggested, it was shot down because the Nomic Bank would give out money, not new players.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I would however recommend that we amend the election rules before next time e.g. by requiring the submitting of a complete voting ballot for eligibility as a candidate.

Why?

[Jake The Wolfie]

Every player that could vote for SC did, while not every player who could vote for Ircher did (aside from SC)

Moreover, I don't particularly think that incentivizing players to become intentionally polarized is a good idea, when the alternative is losing power in the game.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I don't understand what the relevance of the first fact you stated is
I also don't understand in what sense it is incentivising players to "become polarised" or what the downside in that is supposed to be

The goal of the election is to establish what the collective group preference is. When someone does not participate it hinders that goal

and

unfairly furthers that individual's electoral prospects

It makes people become polarized in the sense that if you literally do not care, but will still take the job if offered, then this prevents that from happening. If everyone wants one player to be in the board, a desirable position, then that player would need to show bias towards other players first, even if they don't care about voting.

If you don't

have

a preference, that shouldn't hinder you from being elected. It would be like if voting abstain or not voting at all on proposals costed you 1 point each time you did it, it would incentivize polarization, and we would never have that.

[Jake The Wolfie]

330 has expired. It is therefore rejected. We need more proposals.

Spoiler: Active Discussions as of this post

Code: Select all

===Active Discussions===

====Pending Proposals====
Use the following format (and please make sure to have the initial space on each line!):

 Proposal ### (Post #) by Username: Text body.
 Yea - User1 (#), User2 (#), ...
 Nay - User3 (#), User4 (#), ...
 Not Voting - User5

Also, once a proposal is accepted or rejected, it should be removed and added to the archive. '''If you don't have time to archive it, then simply mark it as accepted/rejected and leave it where it is'''. Please do not remove accepted/rejected proposals without archiving them.

----

 Proposal 337 (Post 316) by Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle: ªpple
 Yea - Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle (316)
 Nay - Ircher (317), Deimos27 (321)
 Inactive - tris (131)
 Not Voting - lendunistus, StrangerCoug

====Pending Motions====
Use the same format as for proposals. The time limit should be part of the actual proposed motion. Please remember also that motions should be archived like proposals. (If you don't have time to archive them, just mark it as accepted/rejected and don't remove it.)

 Motion M005 (Post 319) by Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle: Should proposal 337 pass, Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle will not gain 1 point for it. This motion lasts for either 168 hours or until 337 passes, whichever is shorter. This will fail if proposal 337 fails.
 Yea - Prince Jake, son of the 7th circle (319)
 Nay -
 Abstain - Ircher (320), StrangerCoug (338)
 Inactive - tris (131)
 Not Voting - lendunistus, Deimos27

Uh, ircher? Where in the rules does it say that proposals can expire?

[Jake The Wolfie]

Nevermind, I found it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

brb gonna go be spurious and whatnot with my proposals

[Jake The Wolfie]

You misunderstand what I'm saying then. I am not saying that polarized players are bad, I am saying that

requiring a player to commit to beliefs that they do not hold

is bad, and should not be encouraged. I don't know how you misread this simple and basic idea.
It is not disanalogous, mainly because we should not encourage players to lie. At all. What I just described is called lying, and we should not encourage that. Furthermore, the more a player lies about their stance, the less it will be them lying and the more it will be them telling the truth, a truth that they didn't arrive at organically, but in which they were forced to choose something. Sure, they got a choice in what they chose, but they didn't have the option of "no choice". Attempting to remove "No Choice" is how you get persecution, on all scales and of every measure.

Just because Player A wants power doesn't mean that they are morally obligated to choose other players who want power too. That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works. You're just throwing the term morally obligated around as a buzzword, without backing it up.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I may be dumb...


...


...

[Jake The Wolfie]

You misunderstand what I'm saying then. I am not saying that polarized players are bad, I am saying that

requiring a player to commit to beliefs that they do not hold

is bad, and should not be encouraged. I don't know how you misread this simple and basic idea.
It is not disanalogous, mainly because we should not encourage players to lie. At all. What I just described is called lying, and we should not encourage that. Furthermore, the more a player lies about their stance, the less it will be them lying and the more it will be them telling the truth, a truth that they didn't arrive at organically, but in which they were forced to choose something. Sure, they got a choice in what they chose, but they didn't have the option of "no choice". Attempting to remove "No Choice" is how you get persecution, on all scales and of every measure.

Just because Player A wants power doesn't mean that they are morally obligated to choose other players who want power too. That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works. You're just throwing the term morally obligated around as a buzzword, without backing it up.

What do you even mean by incentivising lying do you actually think we're gonna have a situation where someone has

exactly

0 preference between alternatives. Even then they wouldn't have to lie about it, they could vote and say "I was forced to do it to stay eligible" and there would be no lying involved. Or they

could

make no choice. Then they just don't have the option of still reaping personal gains from other people making a choice. As they shouldn't.

I didn't mean to use "moral obligation" as a buzzword. I meant to summarise in layman's terms a real idea in moral philosophy. Since you want me to back it up I will provide two groundings (this includes that exact quote which I decided to include in my earlier post):

Spoiler:

"When a number of persons conduct any joint enterprise according to rules and thus restrict their liberty, those who have submitted to these restrictions when required have a right to a similar submission from those who have benefited by their submission." (H. L. A. Hart, "Are There Any Natural Rights?", 1955)

It sounds complicated but this principle is always summarised as basically "when we work together to create mutual benefits, each of us who receives from the benefit has an obligation to share in the costs of creating that benefit". If you want to benefit from the existence of the electoral system (i.e. you want to stand a chance to win), you have an obligation to share in the costs that make that electoral system possible: to make a vote (and thereby improving the prospects of your opponents). After all, they do the same for you.

I also refer you to the first formulation of Kant's categorical imperative—universalisability: "act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law" (Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, 1785). What this principle essentially means is that only actions which could consistently be done by everyone (are universalisable) are moral. If no one voted in the election, what would happen? No one would be elected; an election, strictly speaking, could not even be considered to have happened. So "not voting in elections" results in a logically inconsistent (or at least morally undesirable) outcome when universalised as a maxim, and so it cannot be moral.

Do you really think that I could just say "I didn't

mean

to give off the impression that I prefer these people over you, I just wanted to remain eligible" and not be seen as a twat? In either case, you still lose. You either don't say "I was forced to vote" and give the impression that you do prefer these people over others (lying), or you do say it and you look like a twat.

See, I don't believe that. I believe that everyone has an equal right in the necessities and pleasures of life, even if they don't contribute. (which would be extra hard, considering that even if you were given all the necessities and pleasures of life [see, the ultra rich], you won't just stop. You would keep going, finding something to alleviate your boredom. If all of your problems were solved, you would find more problems to solve, or find different problems that have infinitely many solutions. Anyway, this is irrelevant.) Even if you were to be a twat and not contribute, that doesn't mean that everyone else will, and in fact others will still contribute just for fun. Coming back to our election, there will be players here that will never

not

vote, even if they want to be on the board more than anyone else [see: me]. More importantly, there isn't a moral obligation to both want to benefit from the system while also not contributing to the system, mainly because your overall impact will be much less the more people who contribute in that system.

[Jake The Wolfie]

How so? How can you not read that as either "I'm trying to keep up appearances here" or "I'm lying to you, because I'm trying to keep up appearances here."?

Sure, but this is a restriction of the medium. SC not voting did have an impact here because it couldn't plausibly not have an impact, because everyone who is voting must show strong preference here, rather than weak preference. It is not my fault that after stress testing the election that it failed.
What if SC didn't have a strong enough preference to warrant a vote? For example, voting Ircher as a 3rd place and no other votes. In the current system, you can't have weak preferences, so the next solution is to not vote.

Anyone who abstains can do it for legitimate reasons that don't just involve "I do not care.". It could be "I want to give myself the biggest chances to win", or could be "I don't care enough", or "I value you all approximately equally, and so requiring me to rank my choices here is not going to be fruitful.", or it could even be "I didn't want to participate in the first place". Just because someone abstains doesn't mean that they either don't care or will win by any means necessary.

[Jake The Wolfie]

What do you think about the suggestion then that someone who wants to abstain can do so while continuing to participate at the cost e.g. of all other candidates receiving 2nd preference points (3). That eliminates the relative advantage they would have gained without distorting the relative rankings of the other players. Would that

still

be disagreeable to you?

I would want many reforms to the voting process to happen, mainly:

A player may choose to announce their withdrawing from the race. They may no longer be voted for, and any player attempting to vote for them will not vote for anyone at that rank. Note that a Withdrawn play may still vote, or may choose not to vote.

A player may choose to rank as many or as few players onto each line as they want, however each other player's name may only appear once in their ranking, even if this would cause multiple or no players on each rank. (So, a player may rank 2 or more players in 2nd, and may choose to not rank anyone at 1st).

[Jake The Wolfie]

this me me stalling you so that you won't be able to go the the library

[Jake The Wolfie]

Each player has some amount of voting power X. If that player distributes their voting power such that the total amount of votes they submitted is less than or equal to X, then each individual vote will be worth 1. However, if a player distributes their voting power such that the total amount of votes is greater than X, then each vote will be worth X/Y, where Y is the total amount of votes submitted by that player, and where Y > X.

[Jake The Wolfie]

The LAW

of

~attraction~

[Jake The Wolfie]

Well known my ass.

[Jake The Wolfie]

In addition, it should be impossible for a player to have more than X voting power through any methods.

[Jake The Wolfie]

In addition, it should be impossible for a player to have more than X voting power through any methods.

I'm hesitant to suggest that if a player somehow obtains a voting power over X that they should be heavily penalized for it, since it could be an incentive to screw other players over.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 341: Amend 213 to say the following: All players start with the larger of either 0 points, or X points, where X is the equal to the median of how many points each player has.

This would definitely still put newer players in the running for winning, regardless of when they join, which we should pass more legislation to encourage.

[Jake The Wolfie]

1. "Divine command theory" grounds morals in the word of a deity (i.e. it answers the question "what is good?" with "that which [deity] commands"). A famous dilemma for divine command theory can be paraphrased roughly as follows: is x good because the gods judge that it is good, or do the gods judge that x is good because it is good?

Ah fuck, I know what this is because some atheist I watch responded to some preacher or whatever stumble their way through this and came up with "X is good because god is good"

[Jake The Wolfie]

Anyway, it's a dilemma because you either have to admit that Morality is subjective [even if it is subjective to god], or Morality is objective [and therefore does not need god to exist, since morality would exist either way]

[Jake The Wolfie]

Ahh, Viced Rhino? I think that's the one, and he was probably responding to something Eric Hovind did.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I don't know who found the original dilemma though, so there's that.

[Jake The Wolfie]

342 proposes that we steal 10,000 points from you

[Jake The Wolfie]

Welcome to Trivial Pursuit, staring Ircher Manfred, Deimos27, and Coug S.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Question of the Day #2
Category: Literature
Question: Which well-known Russian author's works include "Eugene Onegin", "The Belkin Tales", "The Queen of Spades", and "I Loved You"? (Again, spelling counts; however, I will accept two forms for the author's name. You must provide both a first and last name.)

Give Deimos27 2 Knowledge Points

for providing two reasonable but incorrect guesses for this question. The correct answer was

Alexander Pushkin

. I would also have accepted the spelling Aleksandr Pushkin. Pushkin is considered one of Russia's greatest poet and had a significant impact on many of Russia's later writers and poets. (Also, despite being known for his poetry, Pushkin wrote a lot of prose as well. Most of the titles I named in the question were prose.)

Question of the Day #3

Category: Mathematics
Question: What are

two

different

ways to find the derivative with respect to x of f(x)^g(x) where $f$ and $g$ are arbitrary differentiable functions? (To be clear, I am looking for the names of general methods; you are free to give an example, but simply giving an example without specifying the method used is insufficient. An example of what I mean by method is that if you were asked to find (dy / dx) of f(x)g(x), one method would be to use the product rule.) Also, note that I am asking for two

different

methods. They must be substantively different and not simply a different way of using the same method.)

If you get one of them, you will get 7 KP. You will get the remaining 8 KP if you get the other one. There may be more answers than the two that I am thinking of; I will look into any "novel" ideas.

Method #1: Guess
Method #2: Newton's Method

[Jake The Wolfie]

Practicality, much like reality, does not deter me.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 344: Amend rule 302 to "The player who proposes a proposal that passes gains N$25."

Motion M006: This motion lasts for 72 hours. Victory trophies are added to the shop at the cost of N$1000. When this motion expires, each player gains n * n / 2 points where n is the number of victory trophies they own.

Spoiler: Active Discussions

Code: Select all

====Pending Proposals====
 Proposal 340 (Post 404) by StrangerCoug: Rule 212 is hereby transmuted to immutable.
 Yea - StrangerCoug (404), Ircher (405), Deimos27 (409)
 Nay -
 Not Voting - lendunistus, Jake The Wolfie
 <i>This proposal requires unanimous consent to be approved.</i>

 Proposal 344 (Post 455) by Ircher: Amend rule 302 to "The player who proposes a proposal that passes gains N$25."
 Yea - Ircher (455)
 Nay -
 Not Voting - lendunistus, Jake The Wolfie, StrangerCoug, Deimos27

====Pending Motions====
Use the same format as for proposals. The time limit should be part of the actual proposed motion. Please remember also that motions should be archived like proposals. (If you don't have time to archive them, just mark it as accepted/rejected and don't remove it.)

 Motion M006 (Post 455) by Ircher: This motion lasts for 72 hours. Victory trophies are added to the shop at the cost of N$1000. When this motion expires, each player gains n * n / 2 points where n is the number of victory trophies they own.
 Yea - Ircher (455)
 Nay -
 Not Voting - lendunistus, Jake The Wolfie, StrangerCoug, Deimos27

Ircher why Motion m006

[Jake The Wolfie]

Question of the Day #4
Category: Music
Question: What term describes a pair of parallel slanted lines which are used to indicate a grand pause?

I'm giving this question another hour or two before I reveal the answer.

Probably something really latin, and translates to "for the love of FUCK shut the fuck up"

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 345: Any immutable rule may be altered or deleted via unanimous consent without first transmuting it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Nope, this is purely for political gain, Ircher.
Also, it skips the hassle of making 3 different proposals just to alter 1 immutable rule.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Not really. You could be fine with a rule being immutable, but what the rule is specifically could be a problem.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Hence why I said "probably", not "certainly". It's a rare situation, and the current way allows a rule to be more thoroughly vetted while it's mutable. Your proposal blurs the line between mutable and immutable and simply makes it a matter of whether unanimous consent is required to amend or repeal a rule. I'm not comfortable with that.

I mean, unanimous consent is already required to amend or repeal an immutable rule. The only real exception involves vote manipulation.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I threw out the mana system for others to maybe build upon.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M009 - (This motion lasts for 1 second) The following item shall be added to the Nomic Shop as a permanent: Conjure Wall (N$1000): This spell costs at least 1 mana to cast. When casted, you gain control of a wall with the following text, where X is the amount of mana used to cast the spell: "This wall has a durability of X. If you are the target of a spell, this wall protects you from that spell, and this wall takes damage equal to the spell's mana cost." If you casted this spell using only one mana color, the wall also gains "This has protection from Y.", where Y is the color of mana used to cast this spell.

Proposal 345 - Any player may create and define keywords without the need for any proposal to pass. These keywords should be recorded somewhere on the wiki.

M009 draws a little bit from 345.

The main reason for 345 is so that any time we need a new keyword for stuff, we don't need everyone's approval each time just to define terms.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Also, for reference:

Durability: How much damage this item can take before being destroyed.

Protection from Y: Any spell which has a color identity of Y will automatically fail.

Color Identity: The mana colors used to cast the spell, or the mana colors used as an ability of the spell.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Buy 1 Wastes

[Jake The Wolfie]

You can make a proposition to take care of that, such as "If one keyword has two different definitions, a vote may be held to determine which definition is correct."

[Jake The Wolfie]

1. Who is the President of the ECB? (5KP) - ME, I am.
2. ECB governors are often described as "doves" or "hawks". What is the difference? (10KP) - Both are eternally enslaved by the ECB, however I occasionally release some employees during a wedding. They are called Doves.
2. How did the ECB adjust its inflation target as a result of the 2021 strategy review? (15KP) - We started shoveling money into an Earth burning machine to deflate the economy

and

destroy the Earth!
3. Why is the ECB's current deposit facility interest rate considered "unconventional"? (15KP) - This is vile slander from cowards who won't accept that this is the best way to do business.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I think 345 is going to have to be reposted as 346 as it turns out we had a 345 already (see rule 210). With that being said, it's been well over 72 hours since the (original) 345, so that proposal fails. (This was totally on me though for not noticing it sooner.) Also, with that said, we have no active proposals or motions!

Wait, why did 345 fail? You and StrangerCoug voted for it without either unvoting or negative voting it.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 346 - Any player may create and define keywords without the need for any proposal to pass. These keywords should be recorded somewhere on the wiki.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Question: Who created the printing press? (Remember: Both a first and a last name are needed.)

Johannes Gutenberg

[Jake The Wolfie]

I found something really funny out, and I am actively corroborating with SC to make something hysterical.

I'll give anyone 2 of my vote tickets if they can keep a secret and work with me.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Nope! Just uhh.. read the rules. The oh so many rules. I think you get like 6 points for joining.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Question: Who created the printing press? (Remember: Both a first and a last name are needed.)

Johannes Gutenberg

That is correct!

Give Jake The Wolfie 30 Knowledge Points.

---

is it too late to join?

Signups never close. You are more than welcome to join.
You might want to read about the central bank and submit a vote to StrangerCoug for the currently active election.

awesome, thank you.

first off, i'd like to challenge Jake the Wolfie's answer. I adamantly believe Bi Sheng invented the printing press and it is ridiculously western to claim that gutenberg came up with that idea and invented the product

I'll enter into intellectual (and possibly literal) combat if you join the game

[Jake The Wolfie]

Ircher what the fuck.

We cannot allow this to keep happening.
Allies, we must prevent Ircher's tom-fuckery!

[Jake The Wolfie]

The Semantic Part sounds like a good term for it in English.

[Jake The Wolfie]

(:

[Jake The Wolfie]

I am a god of Chaos

[Jake The Wolfie]

The Hero of Time

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 347: A player immediately wins if they are the only active player in the game.

[Jake The Wolfie]

(You should vote yea to M010 so we can enjoy a Thanksgiving reprieve.)

(no.)

[Jake The Wolfie]

Well, Damn

[Jake The Wolfie]

Sorry, I was offline for quite a bit.

I'm currently prototyping an "Improved Clone" of Underhand (A card game on the Google Play Store, not sure about iOS), so there's that

[Jake The Wolfie]

7. At the start of each new Dungeon Phase, a Dungeon Keeper must submit a proposal for a new Dungeon Phase. The proposal must include the following:
1) A name for the dungeon
2) The amount of time the Dungeon Phase will last in in-game phases/turns or IRL time
3) The amount of floors the new dungeon will have
4) A through description of what each floor will contain
5) A list of enemies, their names, stats, Health/Mana and skills
6) A description of the dungeon’s boss, including their name, stats, Health/Mana and skills
7) A description of the players’ initial stats and Health/Mana and a list of rewards each Level will give

This feels a little meh. The main focus of a dungeon is that it's unknown. This is more like venturing into a Walmart than an Ikea

[Jake The Wolfie]

I do have a few ideas for designing a dungeon, but they'd need to be flushed out more.

[Jake The Wolfie]

nc^2, where c is whatever number gets us to the big o of merge sort

[Jake The Wolfie]

Hmmpt.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Nah, everyone tied for 1st with an astonishing unanimous count of 0 votes each.

Make it a motion before SC replaces the entire board.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Motion M012: M011 shall become an official rule, and cease to be a motion. It shall be labeled the next available Proposal number (At time of creation of this motion, 352.) This motion shall last 1 second.

[Jake The Wolfie]

This is something you can do, there isn't a rule which forbids non-proposal rules from being created. However, rule 102 would make it inactive (as it has not "passed", whatever that means)
114 also would make M011 mutable

[Jake The Wolfie]

So, the following fuckery has happened:

SC can choose literally anyone to be on the board (including non-player) with the caveat that the head must both not be him and must be a player, and that the board is not Me, them, and Ircher.
We can make motions into rules, but they must "pass" in order to become active.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Well, we could do that, or we could do a janky hack that gets rules on the board with less than 5 players active.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Not really sure what to do here, tbh. The dungeon system seems interesting, but not really worth exerting effort into.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Bump

[Jake The Wolfie]

Boop

[Jake The Wolfie]

There was supposed to be an election at some point, I'm sure

[Jake The Wolfie]

Election Fraud

[Jake The Wolfie]

E-liter is a good weapon is Samon Run